Society for Historians of the Early American Republic

American Science in the Age of Jackson by George H. DanielsReview by: Marc RothenbergJournal of the Early Republic, Vol. 15, No. 3, Special Issue on Gender in the Early Republic(Autumn, 1995), pp. 540-541Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press on behalf of the Society for Historians of the EarlyAmerican RepublicStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3124139 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 03:54

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

University of Pennsylvania Press and Society for Historians of the Early American Republic are collaboratingwith JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Early Republic.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.56 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:54:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JOURNAL OF THE EARLY REPUBLIC JOURNAL OF THE EARLY REPUBLIC

of Texas history for most-are presented primarily in the light of their relevance to what went on at Goliad. Some might call this im- balance, but we localists prefer to think of it as recognizing the impor- tance of events less appreciated by generalists.

Remember Goliad! is Number Nine in the Fred Rider Cotton Popu- lar History Series published by TSHA to provide monographs pri- marily to acquaint Texans and others with brief but scholarly studies of important places and events in Texas history. Remember Goliad! is a rose; it is good history and it tells the story well.

Stephen F. Austin State University Archie P. McDonald

American Science in the Age of Jackson. By George H. Daniels. His-

tory of American Science and Technology. (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1994 [1968]. Pp. xx, 282. Tables. Paper, $24.95.)

First published in 1968, and now republished with a new preface by George Daniels, American Science in the Age of Jackson remains the only general study of American science for the period 1815 to 1845. It combines statistical analysis of the American scientific community with intellectual history, with emphasis on the latter. I first read it as a graduate student over twenty years ago. Since its original publica- tion, it has been often cited and sometimes criticized. More recently, it has been ignored.

Parts of the book have stood the test of time. Daniels's argument that the thirty years following the close of the War of 1812 was an

important transitional period in American science is still convincing. His statistics regarding the American scientific community during this period, especially its most active members, are still valid.

As a tool of explanation, however, the book failed then and fails now. Daniels argues that the relative lack of achievement on the part of American scientists "could be traced to the prevalence of an exces-

sively naive philosophy of science that was based, rather loosely, on the teachings of Francis Bacon" (xiv). Some twenty-five years later, Daniels claims in his new preface that "there has been no real debate about the reality of Baconianism as the dominant philosophy of sci- ence in America" (xv). However, he admits that many historians re- fuse to acknowledge the explanatory power of Baconianism.

Three points are to be made here. First, when Daniels claimed the primacy of Baconianism, he simply ignored Joseph Henry's 1837 contention that "no working man of science advocates Bacon [sic]

of Texas history for most-are presented primarily in the light of their relevance to what went on at Goliad. Some might call this im- balance, but we localists prefer to think of it as recognizing the impor- tance of events less appreciated by generalists.

Remember Goliad! is Number Nine in the Fred Rider Cotton Popu- lar History Series published by TSHA to provide monographs pri- marily to acquaint Texans and others with brief but scholarly studies of important places and events in Texas history. Remember Goliad! is a rose; it is good history and it tells the story well.

Stephen F. Austin State University Archie P. McDonald

American Science in the Age of Jackson. By George H. Daniels. His-

tory of American Science and Technology. (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1994 [1968]. Pp. xx, 282. Tables. Paper, $24.95.)

First published in 1968, and now republished with a new preface by George Daniels, American Science in the Age of Jackson remains the only general study of American science for the period 1815 to 1845. It combines statistical analysis of the American scientific community with intellectual history, with emphasis on the latter. I first read it as a graduate student over twenty years ago. Since its original publica- tion, it has been often cited and sometimes criticized. More recently, it has been ignored.

Parts of the book have stood the test of time. Daniels's argument that the thirty years following the close of the War of 1812 was an

important transitional period in American science is still convincing. His statistics regarding the American scientific community during this period, especially its most active members, are still valid.

As a tool of explanation, however, the book failed then and fails now. Daniels argues that the relative lack of achievement on the part of American scientists "could be traced to the prevalence of an exces-

sively naive philosophy of science that was based, rather loosely, on the teachings of Francis Bacon" (xiv). Some twenty-five years later, Daniels claims in his new preface that "there has been no real debate about the reality of Baconianism as the dominant philosophy of sci- ence in America" (xv). However, he admits that many historians re- fuse to acknowledge the explanatory power of Baconianism.

Three points are to be made here. First, when Daniels claimed the primacy of Baconianism, he simply ignored Joseph Henry's 1837 contention that "no working man of science advocates Bacon [sic]

540 540

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.56 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:54:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

method." Henry understood the difference between philosophical dis- course and the actual practice of science. Second, perhaps not surpris- ingly, when Daniels claims there has been no debate about his contention, he continues to ignore Henry and the commentary that Henry's editors supplied (See, e.g., Papers ofJoseph Henry, 3:474-76, or 6:563). Finally, like most of his contemporaries (and it is still true today), Daniels did not approach his topic cross-culturally. American scientists did not work in national isolation. Many of them were par- ticipants in internationally defined research programs, using the same methods and testing the same theories as their European counter- parts. Americans took as their models European scientists like Alex- ander von Humboldt, John Herschel, and Joseph Hooker. These men were not naive Baconians.

Whatever the limitations of the book, however, graduate students in the history of American science ought to read it. The University of Alabama Press must be thanked for bringing it back in print.

Smithsonian Institution Marc Rothenberg

Froth & Scum: Truth, Beauty, Goodness, and the Ax Murder in Amer- ica's First Mass Media. By Andie Tucker. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994. Pp. ix, 257. $34.95; paper, $13.95.)

The development of inexpensive, mass circulation newspapers in the 1830s was a pivotal moment in the history of American journalism. For too long, historians viewed uncritically the shift from a highly partisan "political press" system dependent on the financial support of political parties to an independent, advertiser and subscriber sup- ported "penny press" as a move from the "dark ages" to an enlight- ened future. Many working journalists trace the roots of modern professional norms, such as independent and objective journalism, to James Gordon Bennett, Charles Dana, Horace Greeley, and the other penny-press editors.

In recent years, an important reinterpretation of the penny press, both in terms of its relation to modern journalism and as a cultural product of its time, has generated an important body of work. Andie Tucker's Froth & Scum is a valuable addition to this effort. Using press accounts of three sensational murder cases in New York City between 1836 and 1842, Tucker, a former presidential speech writer and a documentary television producer, examines the role of objective fact, concepts of truth, readers' expectations, and market forces on jour-

method." Henry understood the difference between philosophical dis- course and the actual practice of science. Second, perhaps not surpris- ingly, when Daniels claims there has been no debate about his contention, he continues to ignore Henry and the commentary that Henry's editors supplied (See, e.g., Papers ofJoseph Henry, 3:474-76, or 6:563). Finally, like most of his contemporaries (and it is still true today), Daniels did not approach his topic cross-culturally. American scientists did not work in national isolation. Many of them were par- ticipants in internationally defined research programs, using the same methods and testing the same theories as their European counter- parts. Americans took as their models European scientists like Alex- ander von Humboldt, John Herschel, and Joseph Hooker. These men were not naive Baconians.

Whatever the limitations of the book, however, graduate students in the history of American science ought to read it. The University of Alabama Press must be thanked for bringing it back in print.

Smithsonian Institution Marc Rothenberg

Froth & Scum: Truth, Beauty, Goodness, and the Ax Murder in Amer- ica's First Mass Media. By Andie Tucker. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994. Pp. ix, 257. $34.95; paper, $13.95.)

The development of inexpensive, mass circulation newspapers in the 1830s was a pivotal moment in the history of American journalism. For too long, historians viewed uncritically the shift from a highly partisan "political press" system dependent on the financial support of political parties to an independent, advertiser and subscriber sup- ported "penny press" as a move from the "dark ages" to an enlight- ened future. Many working journalists trace the roots of modern professional norms, such as independent and objective journalism, to James Gordon Bennett, Charles Dana, Horace Greeley, and the other penny-press editors.

In recent years, an important reinterpretation of the penny press, both in terms of its relation to modern journalism and as a cultural product of its time, has generated an important body of work. Andie Tucker's Froth & Scum is a valuable addition to this effort. Using press accounts of three sensational murder cases in New York City between 1836 and 1842, Tucker, a former presidential speech writer and a documentary television producer, examines the role of objective fact, concepts of truth, readers' expectations, and market forces on jour-

BOOK REVIEWS BOOK REVIEWS 541 541

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.56 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:54:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions